ftrace_test_record(9)

πŸ“¦ version 7.3.1, in nixpkgs unstable

πŸ’… ftrace_test_record(9) β€” like, the vibe check for a trace record ✨

okay bestie, so we're in the Kernel API Manual today and this little icon is called ftrace_test_record. she's a kernel function, she's from ftrace land, and honestly? she's doing the most important job of all: checking whether a record is enabled or not. no cap πŸŽ€


✨ NAME ✨

ftrace_test_record β€” check if the record has been enabled or not πŸ’–


πŸ¦‹ SYNOPSIS πŸ¦‹

int ftrace_test_record (struct dyn_ftrace *rec , bool enable );

literally that's it. two args, one int back. short and sweet, main character energy πŸ‘‘


🌸 ARGUMENTS 🌸

  • rec β€” the record to test. like, the actual struct dyn_ftrace you're side-eyeing πŸ‘€
  • enable β€” set to true to check if enabled, false if it is disabled. yes babe, it flips the whole question around, iykyk πŸ”₯

🌈 DESCRIPTION 🌈

so the arch code may need to test if a record is already set to tracing to determine how to modify the function code that it represents. that's the whole plot 🫢

basically the architecture-specific side of things is sitting there going "hmm, is this record already tracing or not?" because that answer changes how it should go about fiddling with the function code that record represents. the way that context matters here?? obsessed πŸ’…βœ¨


🧚 SEE ALSO 🧚

Kernel file ./kernel/trace/ftrace.c plus this whole friend group right here β€” they all hang out together in the source, and you should absolutely go say hi πŸ’œ


ngl bestie, that's a long list of friends but you gotta read them all, okay? i don't make the rules, the manpage does 🫢

and that's the page!! πŸŽ€ this one came from ./kernel/trace and is dated October 2026 β€” so yeah, mark your calendar, screenshot it, send it to the group chat, it's giving archival slay πŸ’–βœ¨πŸ‘‘

πŸ“¦ where this page comes from